1-OVERVIEW

We seek to understand why states and their

leaders make certain choices?
Why we observe certain outcomes?
In this week presentation we will look at
interests, interactions and institutions.
____________________________________

2- Explaining these three

concepts.

Interests: Basically the the aims that the states

seek to achieve.
It could be Power, security.

1
Interactions: Actors need to engage in other
actors to achieve their interests. Interactions
influence the outcomes.

Institutions: Those interactions take place in

specific contexts in which institutions may also
play a particular role, thereby influencing the
outcomes.
_______________________________________
_

3- INTERESTS

interests
What actors want to achieve through political
action; their preferences over the outcomes that
might result from their political choices
▪ Interests determine how actors rank the
desirability of different outcomes, from most

2
 to least preferred. What do we mean by that?

▪ For example, given the United States general

interest in security, it might prefer a
democratic Iraq that is friendly toward
American allies and encourages the
democratisation of other states in the Middle
East
▪ If this best outcome were to prove
impossible, the United States’ second-best
result might be a pro-Western dictator in
Middle East.

_______________________________________
________
4-FORMS of INTERESTS —— 1
▪ Interests can be many and varied, depending
on the specific policy or event under
examination.

3
▪ In identifying the interests of an actor,
analysts sometimes draw on prior theories
of human nature or behaviour;
▪ At other times, they rely on the statements or
actions of the actors themselves;
▪ And at other times still, they assume that
actors have a particular interest.
▪ We can group three main forms of interests:
(i) power or security, (ii) economic or
material welfare, and (iii) ideological goals.

_______________________________________
_
5- FORMS OF INTERESTS—POWER
and/or SECURITY

▪ Political actors are understood to require a

degree of security as a prerequisite to all
other goals

4
 ▪ They may also seek for power in order to
dominate others
▪ Or hegemons seek power to maintain
hegemony or to prevent other competitors
from challenging their hegemony.
______________________________
6. FORMS OF INTEREST MATERIAL
GAINS
▪ Political actors desire a higher standard of
living or quality of life
▪ They seek to increase their income
▪ They seek to improve their welfare
▪ This second set of interests is not
incompatible with the first if we consider
economic welfare as the long-term goal and
security or power as a means to this end.
______________________________________________________________________________

Yani, eğer ekonomik refah uzun vadeli bir hedef olarak

kabul edilirse, güvenlik veya güç bu hedefe ulaşmak için
kullanılan araçlar olarak görülebilir ve bu iki çıkar grubu
birbirine karşı gelmez. 5
7. Forms of Interests
Ideological Goals
▪ Political actors may also desire moral,
religious, or other ideological goals.
▪ Spread of liberal democracy

▪ So it is in the best interests of the US,

according to President Biden, to back Israel

6
 and Ukraine militarily as well as
economically.
▪ The spread of a specific ideology or religion
can define actors’ interests.
▪ Discussion point 1: do you think this third
dimension is only used to justify the
previous two forms of interests, or do
actors genuinely seek to achieve their
ideational aims?
▪ Discussion point 2: Can we think that this
form of interest can also be regarded as a
form of power?
_______________________________________
________
8. Intersts and IR Theories
▪ One can argue that the three sets of general
interests roughly divide the three schools of
realism, liberalism, and constructivism.
Discussion Point 1: Some countries or groups genuinely want to achieve their idealistic goals like spreading democracy or a
specific religion. It's not just a way to justify their actions; they believe in these goals.

Discussion Point 2: Yes, spreading ideas and values can be a type of power. When a country or group influences others through its
culture or beliefs, it gains "soft power," which can make it more influential globally. This soft power is an important part of a
country's overall strength, along with its military and economic power.
7
▪ QUESTION: WHICH FORM OF
INTEREST CORRESPONDS TO WHICH
THEORY.
▪ We cannot say that one set of interests
enables us to better understand the puzzle of
world politics than another.
▪ It depends, perhaps, on the type of issue we
look at.
▪ We may prioritise one set of interests over
others in a particular issue.
▪ For example, why did the US invade Iraq?
▪ ——did the US invade Iraq to spread
democracy, to increase its influence in the
Mideast region, to enhance its security or to
capture oil?
_______________________________________
________
9. INTERESTS AND ACTORS
Actors:

8
The basic unit for the analysis of international
politics. Actors can be either individuals or
groups of people with common interests.
- For example, in the story of the Iraq War, we
can identify the following actors.
States: US and Iraq
Governments: Bush Administration, Saddam
regime
Groups within countries: Sunni and Shiite
groups in Iraq, Interest groups defense
contractors
International Organisation: UN Security Council

_______________________________________________________________

10. STATE AS THE PRIMARY ACTOR IN

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

9
 ▪ A state is a central authority that has the
ability to make and enforce laws, rules, and
decisions within its territory.
▪ The concept of sovereignty is a crucial part
of the definition of the state. Sovereignty
refers to the expectation that states have
legal and political supremacy within their
boundaries.
▪ To say that states are sovereign means that
they have ultimate authority over their own
policies and political processes, such as the
maintenance of domestic order and the
provision of governance
▪ State sovereignty is often assumed to be a
defining feature of the modern international
system, creating anarchy in which no legal
authority is higher than or above the state to
make and enforce laws that bind
international actors. In other the condition
of anarchy is a consequence of sovereignty.
Anarşi, uluslararası ilişkiler teorisinde egemenlik ilkesinin hakim olduğu bir durumu ifade eder.
Bu terim, uluslararası düzeyde devletlerin kendi egemenliklerini sürdürdüğü ve uluslararası toplumda egemen bir yasal otoritenin
bulunmadığı bir sistemi tanımlar.
Anarşi terimi, toplumun iç işleyişi açısından kullanıldığında ise, genellikle düzensizlik, hukukun eksikliği ve kaos anlamına gelir.

10
Bu ifade, "devlet" teriminin soyut bir kavram olduğunu belirtiyor. Örneğin, "Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Irak'a
tehdit etti" dediğimizde, aslında bu tehditi yapanlar Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nin belirli temsilcileriydi. Bu
ifade, "devlet" teriminin bir topluluğu temsil eden soyut bir terim olduğunu ve aslında bu eylemlerin bireyler
veya temsilciler aracılığıyla gerçekleştiğini vurguluyor.
_______________________________________
_______
11. NATIONAL
11. NATIONAL INTERESTS INTERES
▪ Definition: Interests attributed to the state
itself, usually security and power.
▪ In a sense, state is an abstract term.
▪ When we say, for example, “the United
States threatened Iraq,” when, in fact, it was
certain representatives of the United States
who threatened representatives of Iraq.
▪ Sometimes, the state’s representatives act on
behalf of a particular domestic interest
group—for example, when negotiating a
trade agreement that is in the interest of
exporting industries.
▪ Alternatively, state leaders might act to
further their own personal or political
agendas. For instance, they may pursue
specific foreign policies to stay in power.
______________________________________________________________________________
________________

11
12. CASE STUDY: WHY THE US WENT
TO WAR ON IRAQ?

Why George W. Bush, the POTUS at the time,

made the decision to invade Iraq.

—First, we need to look at the context. The first

Gulf War, Sanctions on Iraq, Surgical Air
Strikes in the 1990s, 9/11

—President Bush made the decision to keep

seeking to further the state’s interest in security
or access to a critical natural resource;

—Or one can interpret this decision made by

Bush for his political career, to stay in power.

—Or he made the decision for specific interest

groups, such as oil companies and defence
12
contractors who helped Bush become President
and would help him stay in power for the 2
nd

term.
________________________________
13. So, let us make an overview concerning
actors and their perceived interests.

_______________________________________
________
14. Interactions: Why Can’t Actors Always
Get What They Want?

13
▪ Actors make choices in order to further their
interests. Yet political outcomes depend not
just on the preferences of one actor but on
the choices of others as well.
▪ Before the Iraq war, the US government
determined its national interests concerning
Iraq. It decided to remove Saddam Hussein.
▪ Of course, Saddam Hussein refused to leave;
the form of interaction between the US and
Iraq was the war.
▪ Definition of Interaction: The ways in which
the choices of two or more actors combine to
produce political outcomes.
_______________________________________
_
15. Goals, Outcomes and Anticipation (1)
When outcomes result from an interaction,
actors have to anticipate the likely choices of
others and take those choices into account when
making their own decisions.

14
What does that mean? Let us have a look at the
following example
Consider the Iraq war. In March 2003, when the
tension escalated between the US and Iraq, and
the US asked Saddam to step down, Saddam
Hussein had the following options.
1- Go into exile in a friendly state
2-Stay and resist the US.
_______________________________________
________
16. Goals, Outcomes and Anticipation (2)
What would be the wise choice for Saddam
Hussein?
What if he had complied with the request? What
would have been the outcome?
He chose to resist, perhaps hoping that Bush
would back down. But he did not, so the
outcome was war.

15
If Bush had backed down, then defying the US
demands to step down would have been the best
outcome for Saddam.
There is empirical evidence that Saddam was
expecting other states, Russia, and France to
prevent the war.
He might have calculated that given that there
was no UN mandate, the US would not go to
war, which was not sanctioned by international
law.
Whatever the reason was, Saddam resisted US
demands, and the outcome was war.
_______________________________________
________
17. Cooperation and Bargaining
▪ Interactions can take various forms, but most
can be grouped into two broad categories:
cooperation and bargaining.
▪ Political interactions usually involve both
forms in varying degrees.
16
▪ Definition of Cooperation: An interaction
in which two or more actors adopt policies
that make at least one actor better off
relative to the status quo without making
others worse off.
▪ Why do actors cooperate?
For example, suppose you share a flat with
friends. Instead of cleaning the flat individually,
you make a division of labour, and each person
tends to one room. Why would you prefer to
engage in such cooperation?
Because it is easier cleaning the house together.
In the context of cooperation, at least one party
should be better off, and there should be an
additional value as a result of cooperation.
_______________________________________
____
18. COOPERATION
▪ The community members all benefit if there
are good roads to drive on and clean water to
17
 drink, but again, most likely, no individual
alone can provide these.
▪ A group of firms may share an interest in
lobbying Congress for trade protection from
foreign imports. By pooling their resources
and acting together, they may be more
effective at getting their way than they
would be on their own
▪ In the international system, states may have
opportunities to cooperate to defend one
another from attack,
▪ States may have shared interests in free trade
or stable monetary relations to protect the
global environment or to uphold human
rights.
_______________________________________
___
19. BARGAINING
—Definition of Bargaining: An interaction in
which two or more actors must choose outcomes

18
that make one better off at the expense of
another. Bargaining is redistributive: it involves
allocating a fixed sum of value between different
actors.
▪ Whereas cooperative interactions involve the
potential for mutual gain, bargaining
describes an interaction in which actors must
choose outcomes that make one better off at
the expense of another.

Let us consider State A and State B want to get

the same territory. In the context of bargaining,
they come up with a deal in which they have
their share of the territory. The more State A
gets from this territory, the less State B receives.
_______________________________________
______
20. BARGAINING (2)

19
▪ Bargaining is sometimes called a zero-sum
game because the gains for one side
perfectly match the losses of the other.
▪ For example, if Actor A gains 100 per cent
of a contested piece of territory under a
given bargain, that means Actor B gets 0 per
cent of the territory;
▪ In the context of bargaining, the parties do
not create an additional value but share a
fixed value. Main difference from
cooperation

▪
_______________________________________
________

20
21. BARGAINING AND COOPERATION

▪ Most interactions in international relations

combine elements of both cooperation and
bargaining.

▪ For example, even as the United States,

Britain, and other states had interests in
cooperating to defeat Iraq, they bargained
over how much each would contribute to the
effort.
_______________________________________
________
21. Forms of Cooperation
▪ We can identify different forms of
cooperation.
▪ For example, one form of cooperation is
coordination.
—Definition of Coordination: A type of
cooperative interaction in which actors benefit
21
from all making the same choices and
subsequently have no incentive not to comply.
▪ In coordination situations, cooperation is
self-sustaining because once coordination is
achieved, no one can benefit by unilaterally
defecting.
_____________________________________________________________________________

22. Collaboration
Collaboration is another form of cooperation.

Definition: A type of cooperative interaction in

which actors gain from working together but
nonetheless have incentives not to comply with
any agreement.
A more severe barrier to cooperation arises if
the actors have an individual incentive to defect
from cooperation, even though cooperation
could make everyone better off.

22
We can understand why collaboration occurs in
the prisoner’s dilemma game: What is the game
about?
Evet, söylediğiniz doğru. Tutuklu Dilemması, her iki suçlu arasında bir güvensizlik
durumunu yansıtır. Her iki suçlu da birbirlerinin ne yapacaklarından emin olamazlar,
bu yüzden kendi çıkarlarını koruma eğilimindedirler. En iyi sonuçları elde etmek
istedikleri durum, her ikisinin de birbirine ifade vermesi olacaktır, çünkü bu durumda
her ikisi de felony suçlamasıyla mahkemeye çıkarılsa da cezaları beş yıla indirilir.

Prisoner’s Dilemma. Imagine that the police

have detained two criminals. The district
attorney does not have enough evidence to
convict them on felony charges but can convict
each suspect for a misdemeanour. She confines
the prisoners separately and presents each with
the following offer: “If neither of you is willing
to testify, I will charge both of you with a
misdemeanour and sentence you each to one
year in prison. If you defect on your accomplice
by providing evidence against him, I will let you
go free and will put him in prison for ten years.
However, he has been offered the same deal. If
he provides evidence against you, you’ll be the
one behind bars. Finally, if you both squeal on
one another, you’ll each be charged with a
felony, but your sentences will be reduced to five
years in exchange for testifying.”

23
The rational choice requires…..

_______________________________________
________
23. Do Numbers and relative Sizes of actors
matter in cooperation?
YES.
First, numbers matter. it is easier for a small
number of actors to cooperate and, if necessary,
to monitor each other’s behaviour than for a
more significant number of actors to do so.
For example, firms can organise more easily to
lobby their governments for trade protection
than can consumers, who are typically more
numerous.
Big powers may ensure cooperation.

______________________________________________________________________________
_______

24
24. Iteration, Linkage, and Strategies of
Reciprocal Punishment

Iteration basically means repeated interaction

over time.
▪ Cooperation is more likely when actors have
opportunities to cooperate over time and
across issues.
▪ Even when an actor has incentives to defect
in the current interaction, knowing that the
other actor will refuse to cooperate with it in
the future can offset those temptations.
▪ Therefore, “good behaviour” can be induced
today by the fear of losing the benefits of
cooperation tomorrow.
▪ The threat of reciprocal punishment can be a
powerful tool for enforcing cooperation even
when actors are tempted to cheat.

25
▪ Countries are less likely to cheat on a trade
agreement with a country they trade with
more often and expect to trade with again in
the future
▪ Closely related to iteration is the concept of
linkage, which ties cooperation on one
policy dimension to cooperation on other
dimensions.
▪ For example, If State A defects from
cooperation in the military field, then State B
responds to this by withdrawing cooperative
action in the economic area.

25. Who Wins and Who Loses in Bargaining?

26